This is a guest series by Dr. Drew Grumbles. See Part 1 Here, Part 2 Here, and Part 3a Here.
Having previously explored texts in Deuteronomy that clearly proclaim YHWH as the only God [elohim], we continue the study of the Old Testament Scriptures by analyzing more texts that specifically claim that only one God exists. This time we go to the books of 2 Kings and Jeremiah.
2 Kings 19:15, 18–19
“And Hezekiah prayed before YHWH and said, ‘O YHWH God [elohim] of Israel, who dwells above the cherubim, you yourself are God [elohim], you alone, over all the kingdoms of the earth. You made the heavens and the earth. . . . And they [the kings of Assyria] cast their gods [elohim] into the fire, for they were no gods but the works of the hands of men—wood and stone—so they destroyed them. And now, YHWH our God, please save us from their hand, that all kingdoms of the earth may know that you, YHWH, are God [elohim] alone.”[1]
Hezekiah’s prayer in response to Rabshakeh’s threats reveals where his hope lies. Hezekiah affirms that only YHWH is God. On this basis, YHWH should demonstrate that he is the only God by defeating a nation that claims the help of other gods. As we analyze these verses, note that Isaiah 37:16–20 provides a nearly identical text. Yet one difference occurs at the very end (2 Kgs 19:19; Isa 37:10). Isaiah ends Hezekiah’s prayer with, “. . . may know that you alone are YHWH.”[2] In Hebrew, Isaiah drops (or the writer of Kings adds) the word elohim in between “YHWH” and “alone.” This changes the structure of the sentence in Isaiah to, “You alone are YHWH.” In Kings, YHWH is the subject rather than the object of the verb, meaning “You, YHWH, are God alone.” The writer of Kings makes explicit the claim that only YHWH is elohim.
Earlier, in 2 Kings 19:15//Isa 37:16, Hezekiah says that YHWH is elohim alone, placing a great emphasis on YHWH’s singularity by using three pronouns. One may object that Hezekiah merely affirms YHWH as God over all kingdoms, not as ontologically the only God. However, the “other gods” view makes hay of a theory that gods preside over certain territories. In such a case it would be nonsensical for Hezekiah to say YHWH is god over these other territories if the battle between Judah and Assyria is between YHWH and other gods. This would be a tautology. Consider, “Ashur is the god over Assyria’s territory. But YHWH is supreme over Ashur, and so Hezekiah is asking YHWH to demonstrate his superiority over Ashur.” Hezekiah does not request YHWH’s supremacy or pray for its demonstration. He claims YHWH’s supremacy already over the kingdoms. Thus, 2 Kings 19:15 defeats the idea that other gods rule over nations. YHWH is the only elohim over all kingdoms, at the very least. Yet Hezekiah can make this claim about YHWH because, in fact, YHWH is the only true God.
Finally, note how Hezekiah explicitly denies the existence of other gods in 2 Kings 19:18//Isa 37:19. He seems at first to affirm the existence of elohim behind the idols, saying, “they cast their gods into the fire.” But he clarifies that the reason they were destroyed is because they were not truly elohim. One may object to this conclusion in two ways. First, one may say that the objects of wood and stone are not gods, that these were the items destroyed, but that Hezekiah makes no claims about the spiritual beings’ existence or lack thereof. A first response to this objection is that this is not how idolatry worked in the ANE. A god was connected to his idol. Rituals like the mis pi ritual took place to bring the idol into his house. The idol had to be regularly fed and cared for. This was because the idol’s presence directly correlated to the god’s presence among the people. No, the idol was not the god, but he was the avenue by which the god approached his people and vice versa. An idols’ demise equaled the god’s demise (see the story of Dagon in 1 Samuel 5). Another way to get at this objection is to notice carefully Hezekiah’s reason for their destruction—they were not gods. To say “objects of wood were thrown into the fire because they were only objects of wood” would be a meaningless statement. Hezekiah means more than this. He explicitly denies that these idols have any power, not because they are mere materials (an obvious point) but because they are no gods. The gods had no power to protect their idols because they themselves “are not.”
A second objection could be that Hezekiah merely uses fine rhetoric. They were “no gods” only in a comparative sense, as nothing in comparison to the supreme God. However, this verse speaks about the Assyrians conquering other nations, not YHWH in this case. The Assyrians destroy others’ idols, heralding victory for their deity over other gods. Would Hezekiah really claim that these were “no gods” in comparison with Asshur, god of Assyria? The argument of Hezekiah’s prayer only makes sense in light of a claim that YHWH is the only god and these other gods do not exist. Assyria destroyed the idols because those nations’ gods could not save them (since they do not exist). Would YHWH let the same fate occur to Judah?
Jeremiah 2:11; 16:20
Many scholars see great similarities in the theological emphases of Deuteronomy and Jeremiah. One example of this resides in the prominence of monotheism. Jeremiah contains (at least) these two verses which explicitly deny the existence of other gods. First, 2:11 states, “Has a nation exchanged gods? (But they are not gods). But my people exchanged their glory for what does not profit.”[3] The context indicates that Jeremiah speaks of the people forsaking YHWH after he led them in the wilderness to Sinai (vv. 5–6). They went after “vanity/worthlessness” (hebel). By verse 8, the reader realizes this “vanity” is Baal.[4] Jeremiah repeats in v. 8 that such action is to no gain. In v. 23 he mentions their idolatry again—they “went after the Baals.” Again in v. 28 he chastises them for making gods (elohim). This context helps to clarify the problem— the people exchanged “gods” by trading YHWH for Baal. In this context, Jeremiah makes a very clear statement, “they are not gods.”[5] He elsewhere in the passage argues that the people make a losing exchange of YHWH for Baal because the “gods” are worthless (v. 8). Does he really mean here in v. 11, “they are worthless, but they are gods”? A much simpler understanding of the verse lies in affirming Jeremiah’s claims that these Baals are not actually gods. Indeed, this makes Israel’s actions particularly deplorable. Other nations do not change their gods, and Jeremiah could have merely condemned Israel for taking such a peculiar measure. What heightens Israel’s folly is that they changed gods from the true or real YHWH to what Calvin calls “fictitious gods.”[6] Israel made a very bad trade.
Next, we examine Jer 16:20, “Can a man make for himself gods? But they are not gods.”[7] In v. 11 Jeremiah condemns the people again for going after other gods (elohim). YHWH punishes the people with the judgment of serving foreign gods (elohim) in a distant land (v. 13). When a regathering occurs, Jeremiah says people will come to YHWH and admit their fathers worshiped worthless idols. In v. 19 he uses two of the same words as in Jeremiah 2, “worthless/vanity” and “no profit.” Then in v. 20 the people continue their speech by pronouncing the non-deity of man-made gods. Idolatry clearly provides the context to explain what is not a god (v. 18). Jeremiah does not say that the people made metal images, therefore those images cannot be actual gods. No, he states that the people made idols because they believed in the “gods” behind those idols. Therefore, he outright denies that these “gods” exist.[8] For this reason, the gods are vanity, worthless, and to no profit.
Calvin takes a different tack of exegesis but arrives at the same conclusion as to the non-existence of the gods.[9] Calvin takes the sense of the verse to be, “Shall a man make gods unto himself, when they [men] are no gods?”[10] The idea is that men who are not gods are foolish to attempt to create a god—the created attempt to be creators. Jeremiah, in this reading, makes an argument from the absurd. First, men cannot create gods, so why would they try? Second, Calvin says, “God does not create a god, he creates men; he has created angels, he has created the heavens and the earth, but yet he does not put forth his power to create a new god.”[11] In other words, if YHWH the Creator does not even create gods, why would man attempt to do so? Clearly, then, Calvin denies that YHWH created other gods, while he affirms that YHWH created spiritual beings called angels.
Conclusion
The texts cited above demonstrate what scholars call an “orthodox Yahwishm.”[12] Orthodoxy in ancient Israel meant a “deni[al] [of] the existence of other gods or the validity of their worship. . . .”[13] Sadly, heterodoxy existed in ancient Israel. Not all agreed that YHWH was the only God. For this reason, God’s spokesmen had to continually denounce, even mock, the idolatry of the people. This article has sought to thoroughly analyze just a few texts that demonstrate YHWH’s perspective of other gods. Only YHWH is God. No other gods exist. We have examined only a few texts in only a few books. However, Isaiah becomes one of the most important champions of this view. Isaiah fills a section of his corpus (Isaiah 40–48) with so many affirmations of YHWH’s sole deity that we must examine those texts in a separate article.
[1]וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל חִזְקִיָּהוּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וַיֹּאמַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל יֹשֵׁב הַכְּרֻבִים אַתָּה־הוּא הָֽאֱלֹהִים לְבַדְּךָ לְכֹל מַמְלְכוֹת הָאָרֶץ אַתָּה עָשִׂיתָ אֶת־הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ. . .
וְנָתְנוּ אֶת־אֱלֹהֵיהֶם בָּאֵשׁ כִּי לֹא אֱלֹהִים הֵמָּה כִּי אִם־מַעֲשֵׂה יְדֵֽי־אָדָם עֵץ וָאֶבֶן וַֽיְאַבְּדֽוּם. וְעַתָּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ הוֹשִׁיעֵנוּ נָא מִיָּדוֹ וְיֵֽדְעוּ כָּל־מַמְלְכוֹת הָאָרֶץ כִּי אַתָּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים לְבַדֶּֽךָ׃
[2] כִּֽי־אַתָּה יְהוָה לְבַדֶּֽךָ
[3] הַהֵימִיר גּוֹי אֱלֹהִים וְהֵמָּה לֹא אֱלֹהִים וְעַמִּי הֵמִיר כְּבוֹדוֹ בְּלוֹא יוֹעִֽיל׃
[4] “The Useless One,” as Thompson says (J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, NICOT [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1980], 170).
[5] Thompson, Jeremiah, 170, writes, “No nation had ever changed its ancient gods, even if its gods were not real gods.”
[6] John Calvin, Commentaries on the Prophet Jeremiah and the Lamentations, Vol. I, trans. John Owen (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2009 ), 89.
[7] הֲיַעֲשֶׂה־לּוֹ אָדָם אֱלֹהִים וְהֵמָּה לֹא אֱלֹהִֽים׃
[8] Thompson, Jeremiah, 415, explains, “Clearly, if there was ever to be a universal response to the God of Israel there would need to be a recognition of the unreality of all other gods.”
[9] Calvin, Jeremiah, 332–334.
[10] According to the editor (Calvin, Jeremiah, 333, fn. 1), Calvin follows the Syriac version here. Calvin notes the grammatical difficulty, that in MT the verb “make” is singular while “they” is plural. Thus, the more natural sense is that “they” refers to the gods, not the maker (man). Calvin interprets the verse as if it were “men” (plural).
[11] Calvin, Jeremiah, 333.
[12] Block, The Gospel According to Moses, 218.
[13] Block, The Gospel According to Moses, 218.